From nobody@digitalkingdom.org Mon Oct 05 10:04:43 2009
Received: with ECARTIS (v1.0.0; list lojban-beginners); Mon, 05 Oct 2009 10:04:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nobody by chain.digitalkingdom.org with local (Exim 4.69)	(envelope-from <nobody@digitalkingdom.org>)	id 1MuqzK-0008Ui-Un	for lojban-beginners-real@lojban.org; Mon, 05 Oct 2009 10:04:43 -0700
Received: from cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([75.180.132.121])	by chain.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69)	(envelope-from <phma@phma.optus.nu>)	id 1MuqzF-0008RA-Ff	for lojban-beginners@lojban.org; Mon, 05 Oct 2009 10:04:42 -0700
Received: from chausie ([71.75.215.96]) by cdptpa-omta03.mail.rr.com          with ESMTP          id <20091005170422148.KZXI26368@cdptpa-omta03.mail.rr.com>          for <lojban-beginners@lojban.org>; Mon, 5 Oct 2009 17:04:22 +0000
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])	by chausie (Postfix) with ESMTP id A728A62BA	for <lojban-beginners@lojban.org>; Mon,  5 Oct 2009 13:04:21 -0400 (EDT)
From: Pierre Abbat <phma@phma.optus.nu>
To: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
Subject: [lojban-beginners] Re: using 'se' in conversation
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 13:04:17 -0400
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6 (enterprise 0.20070907.709405)
References: <7f1d42860910021120n1033c6a3wbef9131c23f2c9a0@mail.gmail.com> <27513e550910022003g4c4bb780s8c36f55c805feba0@mail.gmail.com> <96f789a60910050447q7f476f89mda57aa07f9ac1607@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <96f789a60910050447q7f476f89mda57aa07f9ac1607@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200910051304.18485.phma@phma.optus.nu>
X-archive-position: 2449
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org
Errors-to: lojban-beginners-bounce@lojban.org
X-original-sender: phma@phma.optus.nu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-to: lojban-beginners@lojban.org
X-list: lojban-beginners

On Monday 05 October 2009 07:47:41 Michael Turniansky wrote:
>   The most literal translation of the English is "mi pu noroi viska da
> poi na se nelci be mi" (I have up-to-now 0-times seen something which
> it was not true it is liked by me)

Why is "pu noroi viska" grammatical, but not "noroi pu viska"?

Pierre